How can someone like Ravana more than Ram? - Page 4

Originally posted by: fatssrilanka

Hi, Good to know about Sita's mandir. Looking forward to interact with u to know abt Ravana from ur (mean Sri Lankan's) view.

My long time question: Here Sri means Lakshmi, so does it mean lakshmi island? (just to know)

I think the major difference in opinion lies in the fact that some consider Ram as a flawed human being and some, like myself, consider him an ideal human being who was not flawed but perfect in every way, because he was an incarnation of the Lord and the Lord can make no mistakes. I cannot point fingers at Shri Ram or Shri Krishna. Who am I, a mere human crawling on this Earth, to say the Lord made this or that mistake?

my whole take husband Ram king Ram both clash. king Ram won as he had to look after his praja which were many and not one. husband ram lost coz he was king Ram. it is said that Lord Ram used to sleep on bed made of dry grass on floor near their bed. and whole grass used to get wet cause crying in pain of Sita ji Viyog ( separation ). ok for a moment assume that Lord Ram was not a gud husband. but it makes sense that he made himself deprive of seeing his child and didn't break his ek patni vrat . he could broke maximum for pleasure and minimum for doing rituals. and seapration can be taken as reverse psychology. by separation he made sure that no body doubts mata sita. and took all blame for being cruel husband, it simply shows his deep love for Sita ji over his self love as individual.😳

Originally posted by: crazygul

my whole take husband Ram king Ram both clash. king Ram won as he had to look after his praja which were many and not one. husband ram lost coz he was king Ram. it is said that Lord Ram used to sleep on bed made of dry grass on floor near their bed. and whole grass used to get wet cause crying in pain of Sita ji Viyog ( separation ). ok for a moment assume that Lord Ram was not a gud husband. but it makes sense that he made himself deprive of seeing his child and didn't break his ek patni vrat . he could broke maximum for pleasure and minimum for doing rituals. and seapration can be taken as reverse psychology. by separation he made sure that no body doubts mata sita. and took all blame for being cruel husband, it simply shows his deep love for Sita ji over his self love as individual.😳

😊 😊 Reading this brought a big smile on my face..
LOVE.. itself is divine, selfless, its from heart and soul.. it doesnt need approval or
need to prove..

Originally posted by: shruthiravi

See the problem I see is because of the wrong intrapretation of the epic and its usage at places where it shouldn't be used.

There are many people who use Ram's abandonement of Sita to subjudicate woman. And it is a fact in our society. Our movies and teleserials glorify the subjudicated, abused leading lady crying buckets of tears as Sita Maiyya.

The dumb leading man standing beside her when all such abuses are hurled at her or he himself throwing her out is compared to Lord Ram.

When it is pointed out the abduction of Sita happened because she crossed Lakshman Rekha hence woman has to be in the confines of the boundary set by men.

Women cannot walk in night, because there are some unruly men who can harm them. So Men can be irresponsible, women needs to be responsible and if anything untoward happens it is woman's fault. Point it to Lakshman Rekha. Such intrapretations in folklores, daily life and in general in society have created an agitation towards Agnipareeksha and Sita banishment. So rather than running away from such questions it is better such questions are answered which will be understandable to present generation.

If you look Ramayana, Ram kills Bali, but his wife Thara has great reverence for Ram and even instructs her son Angad to support Ram in the war against Raavan. Why would a slain man's wife support her husband's murderer.

Same is the case with Mandodari. Mandodhari is also not showing any anatagonism towards Ram.

And Ram is shown giving respect to both these women. After Raavan's death as per the story I know Ram gives clear instructions to Vanar Sena that Mandodhari should be allowed to see her husband's body and she should be treated like a queen. Nothing less.

Except for Panchali all the other 4 women which Hinduism treats as Panch Kanya are connected to Ram one way or other. Sita, Tara, Mandodari and Ahalya.

So its time for us to understand in better fashion why Ram did what he did. What was his real message to the society.

I will never believe 7th incarnation of Lord Vishnu gave the message of women subjudication, physical purity over emotional purity, giving punishment to a woman for a man's mistake. If that was the case he would have never liberated Ahalya the woman who paid the price of Indra's mistake.

So I would like to understand him better and hope CVs oblige me.

Originally posted by: ..RamKiJanaki..

I think the major difference in opinion lies in the fact that some consider Ram as a flawed human being and some, like myself, consider him an ideal human being who was not flawed but perfect in every way, because he was an incarnation of the Lord and the Lord can make no mistakes. I cannot point fingers at Shri Ram or Shri Krishna. Who am I, a mere human crawling on this Earth, to say the Lord made this or that mistake?

For me, Ramayan is very much a divine book and I like seeing the deification of the characters. I cannot take them as just mere human beings. It doesn't work for me that way. But we went through the same debate in the Star Plus' Mahabharat forum. Some people don't believe in the incarnations, and if they do, they believe even incarnations can make mistakes, which is a concept that simply doesn't sit well with me.

Anyway, each to their own. Live and let live.

Yes you are absolutely right! even I think that an incarnation of God can never make mistakes and even I don't like like that concept that God incarnated as a human so even they made mistakes,I can't believe this no matter what.For me Ram is God and God can never be wrong. Even though a part of me doesn't like Lord ram's decision to ask goddess Sita to leave Ayodhya but still I can't see Lord ram as a flawed person.But in the end everyone have their opinions and they may not think what I think but it's just that I didn't liked the comparison between Ravana and ram,for a person like me ram is God and Ravana even if he was a great devotee of Lord shiva,he was the person because of whom God had to incarnate and manifest that good always triumphs over evil.so comparison between them had offended me so I made this post but at last as I said everyone have their own opinions so I will respect it.

raavan in my opinion, was the ultimate vilain ever, vedagya bramhan, mahabali, mahapandit he was, but, he was also a lusty, greedy and powerhungry person. his unlimited prowess was the root for his hubris which was the cause of his doom. as for him being a favourite charecter of someone, the reason that ram was bad him being great, as said by janki, is absolutly wrong, shree ram was maryada purushottam none the less, the ultimate hero. well, i like raavan for his positivities, being a greatest musician and being the mahantam shivbhakt and being the composer to the shivatandava stotram. waise bhi dashaanan agar lankeshwar, kaal ko haraakar use apne singhasan mein baandh ne wala, navagraho ko apne vash mein karne wala mahaparaakrami raavan nahi hotaa toh use harane ke liye narayan ko maryada purshottam shri ram kyun ban na padhtaa?

Originally posted by: Panoramic

Thanks to daily format and habit of taking feedback from fans, everyone ruins shows.

Maybe fans and today's audience are also to blame for sensationalism and dependence on OTT glamour.

There are so many interpretations and I think that's the key reason why people have different beliefs and opinions.